Giuliani Tacks Right On Gay Marriage and Towards Victory on War

Giuliani's bit about "The Next Foreign Policy" (his, I gather):

We must learn from [the pre-9/11 escalation of terrorist attacks against us without meaningful reprisal] for the long war that lies ahead. It is almost certain that U.S. troops will still be fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan when the next president takes office. The purpose of this fight must be to defeat the terrorists and insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan and to allow these countries to become members of the international system in good standing. We must be under no illusions that either Iraq or Afghanistan will quickly attain the levels of peace and security enjoyed in the developed world today. Our aim should be to help them build accountable, functioning governments that serve the needs of their populations, reduce violence within their borders, and eliminate the export of terror...

We cannot predict when our efforts will be successful. But we can predict the consequences of failure: Afghanistan would revert to being a safe haven for terrorists, and Iraq could become another one—larger, richer, and more strategically located. Parts of Iraq would undoubtedly fall under the sway of our enemies, particularly Iran, which would use its influence to direct even more terror at U.S. interests and U.S. allies than it does today...

And on gay marriage, which he's always claimed to oppose, he's also finding more disagreement with "civil unions" as they're currently conceived.

Giuliani has described himself as a backer of civil unions and is frequently described that way in news reports. But he began distancing himself from civil unions in late April, when his campaign told The New York Sun that New Hampshire's new law goes too far because it is "the equivalent of marriage," which he has always opposed for gays.

Giuliani's aides offered little explanation of what specific rights he would support for same-sex couples.

In an interview and follow-up e-mails, Maria Comella, the campaign's deputy communications director, told the Globe that Giuliani supports domestic partnership laws similar to the one he initiated in New York in 1998.

The New York law primarily ensures benefits to partners of municipal employees. The law created a registry of partnerships that also helps city residents obtain partner benefits from private companies that extend them. However, most of the registrants are unmarried heterosexual couples.

Comella said Giuliani has always supported the New York model of domestic partnership laws but she did not explain what is widely viewed as an inconsistency in his position.

Not pimpin', just postin'.

Though this new CBS poll, showing Giuliani twenty points out ahead of even Teh Mighty Fred, does again raise the question: Could you live with him as nominee if you had to?

I could, of course, even though I'm almost as unhappy with some of his social positions as true social cons. But if this whole Teh Fred thing turns out to have been a bit of a flash in the pan, the Giuliani Option is going to have to be reconsidered, especially by those who have written him off.

38%? I'm no mathematician, but I my powers of guesstimation tell me that's more than three quarters of the way to a majority. In a fairly divided field, no less, in which some are still holding out for Newt Gingrich.

Would it help ease the sting if it's kept in mind that Giuliani would likely spank Hillary! Clinton in ways she could only dream her husband would?

posted by Ace at 03:54 PM

| Access Comments